Flickr Photos

Shanks first caught the public eye in 2002, when, at 13, he was charged in connection with the killing of Charlie Young Jr. Witnesses said he was part of a mob of up to 16 males, ages 10 to 32, who beat Young, 36, with weapons including shovels and tree limbs after one of the boys started an altercation by throwing an egg at Young. […]Shanks was sentenced in Children’s Court. Shortly after he was released from custody in 2006, he was charged in the armed robbery of a 41-year-old man. The man told investigators he was attacked by three or four males and was hit in the head with a brick or a similar hard object, opening a cut that required seven staples to close, according to the criminal complaint.

Shanks was in custody for about 14 months while the case worked its way through the courts, but then he was enrolled in a pretrial monitoring program. He was allowed to live at home and ordered to wear a GPS bracelet on his ankle that would alert authorities if he left without court authorization.

That arrangement worked until Sept. 23, when Shanks, now 19, cut off the bracelet, according to court documents.[…]A 36-year-old man walking down the street about 11:20 that night told police that two men jumped out of a van, pointed guns at him and ordered him to remove his clothes, Schwartz said.

After taking off some of his clothes, the 36-year-old man took off running but was shot, Schwartz said. He was treated for his injuries and released.[…]The police gave chase, but the people in the van bailed out, Schwartz said. Only one of the people in the van was caught, and that person — Shanks — dropped a gun while he was running from police, she said. […]“The phenomenon of the repeat violent offender is not an uncommon one,” Flynn said. “It can be a serious challenge to police motivation to (ask officers) to go out there and risk their lives dealing with people who are armed and veterans of the criminal justice system.

“I’ll tell you right now that this guy is a poster child for the failures of the juvenile justice system and the failures of the adult justice system. I have one hope, and I hope that the court will learn from experience as rapidly as he has. He has learned that he can kill and maim without consequence.”

Last night driving home, Wisconsin Public Radio had a story on Gov. Doyle receiving an award from a leftists organization for his efforts in reducing efforts to move habitual criminals to the adult system.

The report was positive but had me screaming at my radio.

The leftists group complained that the % of blacks being sent to jail was higher then that of whites. They also complained that the sending young-ish offenders (17 years) to the adult system was a bad idea and made things worse. Of course they said Wisconsin was a racists state too (multiple times).

They misused (through idiocy or purposeful deceit) the stats – they swapped cause and effect.

It seems obvious to me that those young criminals being sent to adult court will commit more crimes over time because they were sent to adult court in the first place because they have already committed many crimes. The solution is longer sentences.

The leftist group saw the stats in reverse. Since, those sent to adult court commit more crimes, it must be the fault of adult court that the criminals are committing more crimes.

She was a do-nothing as a police chief – waiting until the last year of her term to try to effect some crime reduction (IMHO she was just trying to pad her resume for any post-chief consulting gigs) – and now she is suing the City of Milwaukee because her successor is paid more then she was:

Milwaukee’s first female police chief contends that she was discriminated against when the Fire and Police Commission chose to pay her successor a higher salary than she received.

Nannette Hegerty filed a gender discrimination complaint with the Equal Rights Division of the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development this month, Assistant City Attorney Don Schriefer said Sunday.

At stake could be thousands of dollars of back pay as well as a boost to Hegerty’s pension, which is based on her last three years of salary.
[…]
Hegerty came to the chief’s job after serving as U.S. marshal in the eastern district of Wisconsin. She left earning a salary of $132,544. [Link: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel]

I am not sure how somebody can sue to retroactively have their compensation raised for a contract that they voluntary entered into and have completed. That just seems wrong to me. It is a rip-off to taxpayers if city officials just cave to make their life more comfortable at the expense of the taxpayers and submit to her Lawfare/Extortion.

What about her successor, Chief Flynn?

Flynn was hired last year after 20 years as police chief of five different departments. Flynn’s salary of $143,881 is 8.5% higher than what Hegerty made, but less than the $155,000 he received in his previous position as police commissioner for Springfield, Mass.

Hopefully, with the hiring of Flynn, the line of PC-driven Milwaukee Police Chiefs will stop.

This lawsuit should be thrown out. She should be chastised by the press and forced to pay court costs.

I am a US Citizen living in Milwaukee WI. I have interests in IT, information security, CyberWar, national security, fifth generation warfare (5GW), history, public policy, entrepreneurship, economics, pop culture and the future.